National Fire Insurance v. Shuman

163 S.E. 306, 44 Ga. App. 819, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 533
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 17, 1932
Docket21624
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 163 S.E. 306 (National Fire Insurance v. Shuman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
National Fire Insurance v. Shuman, 163 S.E. 306, 44 Ga. App. 819, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 533 (Ga. Ct. App. 1932).

Opinion

Bell, J.

1. The provisions of the act of 1916 (Ga. L. 1916, p. 128) authorizing a court of record, under certain conditions, to appoint an umpire to act with-appraisers to ascertain the loss or damage under an insurance policy, are applicable only when the appraisers, one selected by the company and the other selected by the insured, shall have failed or neglected, for a space of ten, days after both have been chosen, to agree upon and select an umpire. The mere failure of the insurance company to select an appraiser does not warrant the appointment of an umpire to act solely with the appraiser appointed by the insured. It follows that, where the insurer has selected no appraiser and has not otherwise participated in or consented to an appraisement, a finding or report on the loss, made by an appraiser selected by the. insured and an umpire appointed by the court, is not binding upon the insurer. A stipulation in the policy in the language of the act would not confer upon the court any greater authority as to the appointment of an umpire than the act itself would do.

2. Furthermore, an award by appraisers and an umpire, or any two of them, though properly made under a provision of an insurance policy whieh provides only for the ascertainment of the loss, is neither a [820]*820common-law nor a statutory award, but is a mere contractual method for ascertaining the loss, and such an award can not, merely upon its return and without any suit upon the policy, be made a judgment against the insurance company. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Corbett, 35 Ga. App. 606 (4) (134 S. E. 336).

Decided February 17, 1932. Jones, Jones, Johnston & Russell, Mallory C. Atkinson, for plaintiff in error.

Judgment reversed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Aetna Cas. & Sur. v. Ins. Comm'r
445 A.2d 14 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1982)
Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Insurance Commissioner
445 A.2d 14 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1982)
Standard Fire Insurance Company v. Fraiman
514 S.W.2d 343 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1974)
Roumel v. Niagara Fire Insurance Company
225 A.2d 658 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1967)
Yates v. Cotton States Mutual Insurance Company
151 S.E.2d 523 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1966)
Jordan v. General Insurance Co. of America
88 S.E.2d 198 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1955)
Saba v. Homeland Ins. Co. of America
159 Ohio St. (N.S.) 237 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1953)
PACIFIC NATIONAL FIRE &C. CO. v. Beavers
73 S.E.2d 765 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1952)
Universal Laundry & Cleaners Inc. v. General Insurance Co. of America
12 S.E.2d 181 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1940)
National Fire Insurance v. Shuman
178 S.E. 758 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
163 S.E. 306, 44 Ga. App. 819, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 533, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-fire-insurance-v-shuman-gactapp-1932.